• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Seahawks vs. Packers [01-04-2003]...

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: BostonRedSox
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
yup, definitely should be overruled. was tough call tho. when i saw it in real time i thought it was a fumble too.

either way, it's short of a first.
Click to expand...

Not short of a first, it'll go at the location of the fumble, therefore, first down.
Click to expand...

if he DIDN'T FUMBLE, how can you spot it ON THE SPOT OF THE FUMBLE??

either he did or he didn't.

either way, he was short of the first from the angle i saw.
 
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
Originally posted by: BostonRedSox
Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
yup, definitely should be overruled. was tough call tho. when i saw it in real time i thought it was a fumble too.

either way, it's short of a first.
Click to expand...

Not short of a first, it'll go at the location of the fumble, therefore, first down.
Click to expand...

if he DIDN'T FUMBLE, how can you spot it ON THE SPOT OF THE FUMBLE??

either he did or he didn't.

either way, he was short of the first from the angle i saw.
Click to expand...

LOL, just seeing if you're paying attention. 😛

 
for those that were complaining about the initial call,
rolleye.gif


it was a tough call and it was a good whistle no blow and having gone to replay was good.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top